Mandatory Rotation of Auditors

AbstractIn light of a number of high-profile corporate failures during the first half of 2001, a number of studies have been performed to address the impact of mandatory rotation of audit firms to ensure the appropriate level of independence' of auditors. Majority of studies conclude that the detrimental effects of firm rotation on the quality of the audit work by far outweigh its positive effects as a safeguard against various independence and quality threats.

Frequent changes of audit firms, whether resulting from mandatory rotation or otherwise, introduce threats to independence and operational difficulties that make audit failure more likely. Many studies have involved practitioners' opinions on this issue, which have been based on their experiences and is therefore necessarily more subjective than from impartial, third party studies. There are differing opinions, as some audit firms wish to preserve the client bases, while others welcome more market volatility. Mandatory firm rotation has been concluded as an unnecessary step at present, whose main impact will be the auditing profession and its ability to attract talent for the future. At a time when the restoration of public trust in financial reporting is a key priority, such changes should be avoided.

BackgroundFollowing the failure of HIH Insurance and other listed Australian companies during the first half of 2001, concerns were raised about the adequacy of Australian rules governing audit independence. Auditor independence is fundamental to the credibility and reliability of auditors' reports. Independence is defined to require " a freedom from bias, personal interest, prior commitment to an interest, or susceptibility to undue influence of pressure, any of which could lead to a belief that the audit opinion was determined other than by reference to the facts of the audit alone."

With the increasing globalistion of capital markets and the fact that that section 324 of the Corporations Act in relation to the independence of auditors had not changed in any substantiative form for at least 40 years, it was recognised that this area required attention and revision. The existing regulation prior 2004 of the auditing profession was predominantly the responsibility of the professional accounting bodies. Whereby the legislative requirements were "minimal" and "piecemeal."

International developments were in progress by International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) which aimed to update the ethical requirements of audit independence. European Commission released a consultative paper containing proposals designed to achieve greater uniformity throughout Europe & United States Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) had decided to remake its rules on audit independence to address issues associated with recent independence violations by auditors in the US.

As a part of the growing recognition of the desirability of achieving global uniformity and harmonisation in all areas of financial reporting and auditing, many studies and discussions including the Ramsay report were instigated since 2001 . The CLERP (Audit Reform & Corporate Disclosure) Act 2004 implemented the CLERP 9 measures and the recommendations of the Ramsay Report on the independence of Australian company auditors and took into account the relevant recommendations of Report 391 of the Joint Parliamentary Committee of Public Accountants and Audit.

The CLERP 9 Act draws on the HIH Royal Commission (HIHRC) , Cole Royal Commissions Report and the Ramsay Report in focusing on the importance of an independent audit on capital market efficiency. This is to be achieved through adding value to financial statements by improving reliability, which in turn should assist to lower the cost of capital by reducing information risk and enhancing value to capital market by strengthening the credibility of financial statements.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...AuditorRotation |
Raising Auditor's Independence |
Proposed By: Varun Basantani |
AuditorRotation- Raising Auditor's Independence
-------------------------------------------------
Abstract:
The question for mandatory audit rotation has been a concern to academics, investors, practitioners and the public at large. This paper is designed to determine the relationship between mandatory audit rotations and audit Independence.
The paper makes an earnest effort to evaluate the need for rotation of auditor.
It uses different studies done at various universities at allied subjects.
It compares such provision in various statute like “Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority”, “Banking Regulatory Act”, “Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOx)” etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Introduction
L
ong awaited Companies Bill, 2012 got its assent in the Lok Sabha on December 18, 2012. In this regard, in a current draft of Companies Bill 2012, The Ministry of Corporate Affairs plans the mandatory audit firm rotation in case of listed companies (as may be prescribed), it would be mandatory to rotate auditors – every 5 years in case of the appointment of an individual as auditor and every 10 years in case of appointment...

...of Mandatory Audit Rotation:
As an attempt to strengthen the audit independence and the audit quality, mandatory audit rotation is to be considered as a very good proposal to safeguard the audit independence. It is, however, limited number of years above that the audit firm or the engagement partner (For instance, the U.K. approach is to change only the engagement partner. While in the U.S. approach it is mandatory to change the whole audit firm) can no longer be or continue as the auditor of a company. However, as an attempt to analyse the proposed safeguard there should be some arguments considered whether these arguments favour the mandatoryrotation or they are against it. Bear in mind that this paper will include three pros to audit rotation and three cons to it. Firstly, individuals who support the MAR, has chosen it for some reasons and that is why they prefer the particular safeguard. The well-known and the most important advantage of audit rotation according to Bakshi is that the auditor will know that they will be changed anyway; therefore, they are less likely subjected to the management pressure in which case the independence level will increase (Bakshi, 2004). The author means that the auditorrotation would overcome the main threats of the independence (self-interest threat,...

...MANDATORYAUDITORROTATION: A WAY FOR REGULATORS TO PREVENT AUDIT FAILURES?
1. Introduction
Auditorrotation has long been a subject of debate as a measure to prevent audit failures, especially after the financial crisis. Two types of rotation suggested are firm rotation and audit partner rotation. Mandatoryauditorrotation limits the number of consecutive years that a registered public accounting firm or audit partner can serve as the auditor of a company, and is claimed to be able to enhance audit quality and reduce market concentration. The purpose of this paper is to identify, consider and evaluate the impacts of mandatoryauditorrotation on audit quality and market competition and, accordingly, conclude whether mandatoryauditorrotation is the way to prevent audit failures.
2. Mandatoryauditorrotation in the world
Different countries have different approaches towards mandatoryauditorrotation. Some countries such as Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Spain, etc. have adopted audit partner rotation rather than audit firm rotation. Some countries such as Pakistan, Italy and Oman have adopted...

...﻿INTRODUCTION
Generally, the role of an auditor as an independent person who is appointed to investigate the organization, its records, and the financial statements prepared from them, and thus form an opinion on the accuracy and correctness of the statements (Millichamp, 2002) is understood by everyone. But sometimes the conduct and independence of auditors are questionable as there are cases showing that the behavior of auditors are deviated from their profession where the auditors care about their own benefit. Therefore, audit committees are needed. Audit committees consists of non-executive directors who responsible for all matters relating to appointment, resignation and removal of auditors. The committees make a great impact on the conduct of audit and the independence of external auditor.
THE CONDUCT OF AUDIT
According to Loebbecke and Arens, 1996, they said that audit report is used to inform users what the auditor did and the conclusions reached. According to Millichamp, 2002, he said that most auditors’ reports are positive and end with a statement expressing the auditors’ opinion that the financial statements show a true and fair view and comply with statutory requirements. Audit report is important for shareholders and stakeholders of the company so that the audit report must have professional standard quality. Audit...

...Mandatory Audit Firm Rotation – A Literature Review
Introduction
Since the passing of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, much debate has occurred concerning mandatoryauditorrotation for publicly held companies. Most corporate scandal involves dishonest or questionable accounting. This realization has brought about the priority to take more measures are taken to assure companies disclose the most reliable financial information. It is believed that a lack of auditor independence may be to blame for fraud as we have seen in recent years. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ordered an investigation of whether or not implementation of a mandatoryauditorrotation policy could be beneficial. If this were to take effect it would require that companies obtain a new audit firm after a set number of years; possibly every five to seven years. Lately, some companies have voluntarily put policies in place to reflect this, even though it is not currently required by law (Daniels, 2009).
Pros and Cons of Longer Auditor Tenure
There are several arguments against mandatoryauditorrotation. Many point out that the longer an auditor has worked with a client firm, the more they know the business and the industry of their clients. This is supported by saying that this helps to assure a better...

...(2012) 109 – 138
How Do Various Forms of AuditorRotation Affect Audit Quality? Evidence from China☆
Michael Firth a , Oliver M. Rui b,⁎, Xi Wu c
c
Department of Finance and Insurance, Lingnan University, Hong Kong b China Europe International Business School, China School of Accountancy, Central University of Finance and Economics, China Received 8 June 2010
a
Abstract The Enron/Arthur Andersen scandal has raised concerns internationally about auditor independence, audit quality, and the need for regulatory action such as mandatoryauditorrotation. China's unique institutional features provide a setting in which we can compare comprehensively the various forms of auditorrotation at different levels (partner vs. ﬁrm) and in different settings (voluntary vs. mandatory). In addition, institutional conditions vary dramatically across China, which provides us with an opportunity to test whether the development of market and legal institutions affects the impact of rotation on audit quality. We expect that auditors are less (more) constrained by market forces and less (more) self-disciplined to maintain audit quality in regions with less (more) developed market and legal institutions. Therefore, mandatoryrotation may play a more (less) important role in less (more) developed...

...& Finance The role and function of external auditors
charteredaccountants.com.au
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia
Government and the community The role and influence of governments and other bodies The role and function of external auditors Financial statements are used for a variety of purposes and decisions. For example, financial statements are used by owners to evaluate management’s stewardship, by investors for making decisions about whether to buy or sell securities, by credit rating services for making decisions about credit worthiness of entities, and by bankers for making decisions about whether to lend money. Effective use of financial statements requires that the reader understand the roles of those responsible for preparing and auditing financial statements. Financial statements are the representations of management. When using management’s statements, the reader must recognize that the preparation of these statements requires management to make significant accounting estimates and judgments, as well as to determine from among several alternative accounting principles and methods those that are most appropriate within the framework of generally accepted accounting standards. In contrast, the auditor’s responsibility is to express an opinion on whether management has fairly presented the information in the financial statements. In an audit, the financial statements are evaluated by the...

...Auditor Independence: An Impossible Dream
In recent months there has been much discussion about the independence of CPA auditors; the leadership of the AICPA, the Auditing Standards Board, the Public Oversight Board, the Independence Standards Board, and most recently the proposed independence rules promulgated by the SEC have all attempted to clarify and strengthen auditor independence. Several newspaper and magazine articles have also addressed the issue. In my opinion, all the efforts to tinker with rules of stock ownership by relatives of CPAs and restrict the scope of services provided to attest clients will fail to bring auditor independence until the biggest strain of all on auditor independence is acknowledged and properly dealt with—the fact that the client pays the audit fee.
The ideal of auditor independence has been clearly stated for a long time. The second general standard of Generally Accepted Auditing Standards states that “In all matters relating to the assignment, an independence in mental attitude is to be maintained by the auditor or auditors.” In spite of all that has recently been said and written about the matter, I believe the best explanation of independence is contained in Paragraph 2 of Section 220 of Statement on Auditing Standards #1. It states that the auditor “must be without bias with respect to the client...